On Monday 09 December 2002 11:12, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
> And come to think of it, even in such environment configuration settings
> are host specific rather than shared. Sure, a group of host may share a
> similar situation, but unless you share that data (which is what
> /usr/share is) and your shared version of the configuration file from
> a host in that group rather than a server, chances are it'll be out of
> sync anyway with the actual applications installed on the hosts.
The point is that if you mount applications from location X that you also pull
your default config from location X.
> > > What I was thinking is "/etc is for configuration, /usr/share is for
> > > data" such that any given file would belong in sysconfdir or datadir,
> > > not potentially both.
> > >
> > > Reading the FHS, I don't see anywhere else to put shared configuration
> > > other than /usr/share, so I understand now what you are saying.
>
> What do you mean with "shared configuration"? As explained above, I
> believe there is no such thing.
>From what I understand you basically say that you need to go to great
difficulty to get a shared configuration in /etc and that because you need to
do that anyway you don't see the benefits of an easier solution.
> And how do you get to the conclusion that any configuration at all
> should go in /usr/share?
> FHS specificically says "The /usr/share hierarchy is for all read-only
> architecture independent data files."
> I wouldn't say configuration qualifies as data, nor as read-only. And it
> can indeed even be arch dependent (although it usually won't be).
Since the FHS doesn't say where shared config data is supposed to go then, I
think it is reasonable to put it under /usr/share.
Cheers,
Waldo
--
bastian kde org -=|[ SuSE, The Linux Desktop Experts ]|=- bastian suse com